• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

India All Time XI

ret

International Debutant
3 spinners in a side is an overkill, especially considering the conditions now

you need 3 genuine quick bowlers in the side, with one spinner and one all-rounder, who is also a spinner in Mankad / Shastri

bowling attack for me would be

Quicks - Nissar and Amar
fast bowling all-rounder - Kapil

Spinner - Chandra
spin bowling all-rounder - Mankad

A wkt-keeper all-rounder in Engineer / Dhoni gives batting a depth
 

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
With great top 5 batsmen that we have, and a wicketkeeper-batsman like Engineer and an al-rounder like Kapil in the team...Certainly the batting looks very strong...The bowling is the weaker point...That's why I'll choose 4 of the best bowlers (except Kapil) as the last 4...5 specialist bowlers (along with Hazare) is a necessity in India All Time XI according to me...
 

ret

International Debutant
Hazare .... 30M, 2840 balls, 20 wkts .... a whopping SR of 142

If Hazare is bowling in a game involving the all-time X1, the chances are that India would be in big trouble and looking to break a big partnership, may be with Don playing on 202 and someone on 167


what amuses me in this selection process is probably the fact that ppl realize that an all-time Indian X1 is not that strong, esp for its bowling

I have Amar Singh and Md Nissar in my all time Indian X1 even though I have no clue on how they bowled .... because they bring in the unknown quality to the Indian attack

for e.g. let's take samples of some of the all time pace attack of


Pakistan
Wasim
Waqar
Imran

Australia's
Lillie
McGrath
Thompson

WI
Marshall
Holding
Roberts

and compare that with India's
Kapil
Srinath
?

yep. there is a marked gap .... so what we do by bringing in the unknown factor of Amar Singh and Md Nissar is bridge that gap on paper .... Since it's hard to show how good or bad these two would have been, you can very well assume that they were as good as the best in business .... we can assume that they were as fast as bullet-train and swung the ball like boomerang .... and that assumption makes the Indian pace attack competitive on paper

similar is the case with opening .... select Gavaskar as he is rated as the best for his performances in the tests .... and then get Merchant in and argue that he would have been amongst the best IF he had played more based on his FC average .... but ofc his FC average of 72 is not good enough to rank him as the best over Gavaskar, who has a FC record of 52 because Gavaskar has a better test record, but that FC average makes him better than others irrespective of their test record

so here we have an all-time Indian 11

- Gavaskar [#1 opener, based on his test record]
- Merchant [based on his FC average of 72, which is not good enough to make him better than Gavaskar, who has a FC average of 52, but good enough to make him better than others :wacko: ]
- Amar Singh [swings like boomerang, as i have heard it somewhere, probably in a book titled 'how he made the cows dance']
- Md Nissar [faster than a bullet train, again read that in 'how he made the cows dance', where a local writes 'when he bowled, i couldn't see the ball but hear my stumps rattle]

selecting an Indian all-time X1 is a complicated process
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I have Amar Singh and Md Nissar in my all time Indian X1 even though I have no clue on how they bowled .... because they bring in the unknown quality to the Indian attack
Nissar and Amar Singh were excellent bowlers. Pretty much everyone who faced them talked of them posing significant challenge. Had they played more Test cricket they might well have had an obvious case for being two of India's best bowlers, and unequivocally their best two seamers.

As it is, the unwary might think them no more than Chaminda Vaas and Nuwan Zoysa (neither of whom are hopeless BTW).
 

ret

International Debutant
Nissar and Amar Singh were excellent bowlers. Pretty much everyone who faced them talked of them posing significant challenge. Had they played more Test cricket they might well have had an obvious case for being two of India's best bowlers, and unequivocally their best two seamers.
I agree with that .... at least for the sake of making the Ind pace attack look competitive on paper .... may be there were as good as Marshall and Holding, if not better :p

so now Ind has 3 killer pace bowlers
Amar
Nissar
Kapil

so a 4th bowler in a spinner would do the job in the hypothetical line up .... so I will take Chandra, who had a reputation of destroying the opposition .... but no matter who the spinner is, hypothetically, he is going to make the batsmen dance on any surface and is playing all the games in the form of his life

the Ind attack is now as good as any :)
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Always would go Nissar, Amar Singh, Kapil, Gupte myself - backed now by Mankad and Hazare.
 

ret

International Debutant
with the bowling attack finalized let's select the others

openers
Gavaskar and Sehwag

#3
Merchant .... now the #3 is as strong as any other top teams all-time X1 like WI with probably Richards and Australia with Don, based on the 'unknown' factor of Merchant

#4
Tendulkar

#5
Dravid

#6
Hazare or Mankad

Hazare, 30M
2192 R @ roughly 48, 7H, 9 F
20 Wkts, SR 142

Mankad, 44M
2109 R @ roughly 32, 5H, 6F
162 W, SR 91

#7
Kapil

# 8 WK all-rounder
Engineer or Dhoni

Engineer, 46M
2611 @ 31, 2 H
66 C, 16S

Dhoni, 29M
1418R @ 34, 1 H, 9 F
68C, 14S

#9
Amar

#10
Nissar

#11
Chandra


now imagine Australia vs India

Amar and Nissar are making the stumps fly, swinging, reverse swinging. even the Don is struggling
Australian bowlers can't get past Merchant .... Don is wondering if Merchant is the 2nd best batsman after him

imagine WI vs Ind

Amar and Nissar are making Marshall and Holding wonder if they need to jack up their pace to match Amar and Nissar's, who are breathing fire
and the WI pace trio, along with Lance Gibbs can't go past Merchant. Sobers, who is standing at the slips is wondering, if Merchant's bat is as big as a table

All the perceived weaknesses that the Indian team has have been solved by Amar, Nissar and Merchant .... no all-time X1 can beat Ind's :Jumpy: :clap:
 
Last edited:

ret

International Debutant
http://www.cricketnetwork.co.uk/main/s119/st26334.php

a nice article on Nissar and Singh




according to C.K. Nayudu who played against them both, Nissar was, early in his spells, faster than Englishman Harold Larwood. Off a runup of about twenty-two yards, the length of a cricket pitch, he gathered himself for the final uncoiling of his massive frame in what was one of the great sights in cricket according to contemporary Rusi Modi. Besides the basic requisites of speed, line, length and swerve, Nissar possessed a deadly yorker. This fact is underlined when one realizes that more than half of his 25 victims in a mere six Test matches were either bowled or leg before wicket.

In India's first-ever Test, played at Lords against England in 1932, Nissar dismissed within the first few overs both Herbert Sutcliffe and Percy Holmes, who just ten days earlier had put together a world record partnership of 555 runs for the first wicket for Yorkshire. When Frank Woolley was then run out the English score read a shocking 19 for 3 and Lords was abuzz. Soon, Amar Singh got into the act and bowled Wally Hammond for 35. England were now well and truly reeling, and were eventually bowled out for 259 with Nissar bagging 5 for 93. That England managed to win the match was a result of the dogged batting of their captain, the ruthless Douglas Jardine, who scored 79 and 85 not out, and the frailty of the Indian batting line up which except for C.K. Nayudu, and Amar Singh in the first innings, looked all at sea against professional seam bowling in helpful conditions. If India had been able to use the services of Duleepsinghji, who was soon to be picked by England to represent them against Australia, or Iftikar Ali Pataudi, who also was to soon represent England against Australia, the story could have been different and India would probably not have to wait for another 40 years to record its first Test win in England.

At the end of the match Jardine wistfully remarked that he would love to have a bowler like Amar Singh to take with him to Australia to battle Bradman, but did not mention Nissar. Maybe Jardine, who was India-born and had played some cricket in India, knew that unlike Larwood, Nissar was not a man who could be coerced into bowling an intimidatory line. Nissar's captain in the Presidency matches Wazir Ali, leading The Muslims, found this out to his chagrin when in the 1939 Pentangular match against The Hindus, he instructed Nissar to intimidate Vinoo Mankad, who had an injured thigh, with bouncers. But the gallant Nissar refused to do so. An occasional bouncer is every fast bowler's birth right, but to persistently bowl bouncer after bouncer simply to intimidate the batsmen is not within the spirit of the game. And Nissar played the game in its best traditions and spirit. Besides, Nissar had no need to resort to intimidatory tactics as he was talented enough to dismiss top class batsmen without such means.

Nissar took five wickets in an innings three times in the six Tests he played. He also gave a devastating demonstration of his prowess when an Australian team under Jack Ryder visited India in 1935-36 for a series of "unofficial" Test matches. In just four "Test"matches against the Australians he scalped 35 wickets at the measly average of 13 runs each. Bradman in his foreword to Rusi Modi's book on Indian cricketers writes: "Two other great Indians never to visit Australia were Nissar and Amar Singh, but my Test Selector colleague and Test Captain Jack Ryder played against them in India. Many nights I sat with him into the small hours being enthralled listening to his stories of their skill."

The other member of the great duo, Amar Singh, was from Rajkot in Gujarat. He too was tall, over six feet two inches and broad shouldered, though wiry. He was not really fast, but rather fast-medium, and used his height to great advantage to extract bounce and movement. Off a run up of little more than a dozen yards, Amar Singh generated so much energy from a clean and efficient action that Wally Hammond, one of England's greatest batsmen, said of him: "He came off the pitch like the crack of doom." And indeed, English conditions were ideally suited to Amar Singh. In 1932 on India's first official tour to England, he took 111 first class wickets at 20 runs each to Nissar's 71 at 18 runs each. Hammond was so impressed by Amar Singh's guile, he stated unequivocally in 1932 that Amar Singh was the best user of the new ball in the game. This was just before the Bodyline series, and England had bowlers such as Harold Larwood, Bill Voce, Bill Bowes, and Gubby Allen available to operate with the new ball.

With the new ball Amar Singh could make it swing both ways, and when the shine was off, his devastating breakback often penetrated the defense of well set batsmen, castling them comprehensively. One of the keys to Amar Singh's bowling was that he always attacked the stumps, unlike some modern bowlers of similar pace who are content to bowl a metronomic line wide outside the off stump, waiting for the batsman to make mistakes or lose patience. Indeed it was very rare to see him vary his attacking field much, which generally consisted of two or three slips, a gully, a cover point, and third man on the off side. On the leg side he usually had a short fine leg, a forward short leg, a silly mid-on and a long leg. He maintained this field against all batsmen, from the C.K. Nayudus to rank tailenders.

In seven Test matches Amar Singh took 28 wickets at 30 runs each, and his best figures were 7 for 86 from 44.4 marathon overs bowled in the absence of Nissar in Madras in 1933-34, against an England team led by Jardine, fresh from its triumph over Australia in the Bodyline series. Amar Singh also captured 10 wickets at 19 runs each against Jack Ryder's Australians in two unofficial "Tests" in 1935-36, while missing the other two due to illness. In 1937-38 he bagged 36 wickets at 16 runs each in 5 unofficial "Tests" against Lord Tennyson's visiting M.C.C. side. In 1938, while playing for a Lancashire league side, Amar Singh was picked to represent an England XI against the visiting Australians at Blackpool. He captured six Australian wickets including Stanley McCabe (the hero of the Bodyline series), Lindsey Hassett (one of Bradman's invincibles and a future Australian captain) as well as Bill Brown, another future Australian captain. It was a pity that Bradman sat this match out, though odds are that he too would have fallen to Amar Singh's guile and accuracy.

Amar Singh's batting however had very little guile. He was a devastating low order hitter who often contributed to the team with his bat. He scored the first Test half century for India when he smashed the English attack for 51 in India's first Test at Lords. He flayed an unbeaten 131 against Lancashire coming in at number 10 that same summer. He was also the first player in the history of the Ranji Trophy to score 1000 runs and take 100 wickets.

An area where Amar Singh's contributions to his team is often overlooked was his superb slip fielding. According to Rusi Modi, he was easily in the Simpson or Hammond class in this specialist position and helped his bowling partner, Nissar, on several occasions by taking catches of the highest caliber in the slip cordon. Unfortunately for India he was the exception, and Nissar and Amar Singh both suffered umpteen spilled catches in the slips, which if held would have added much gloss to their already impressive records.
 
Last edited:

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
3 spinners in a side is an overkill, especially considering the conditions now

you need 3 genuine quick bowlers in the side, with one spinner and one all-rounder, who is also a spinner in Mankad / Shastri

bowling attack for me would be

Quicks - Nissar and Amar
fast bowling all-rounder - Kapil

Spinner - Chandra
spin bowling all-rounder - Mankad

A wkt-keeper all-rounder in Engineer / Dhoni gives batting a depth
Not if the Indian All-time XI is at home since you would expect the groundsmen to prepare pitches tailor made for their spinners thus making them almost invinsible at home.
 

ret

International Debutant
Not if the Indian All-time XI is at home since you would expect the groundsmen to prepare pitches tailor made for their spinners thus making them almost invinsible at home.
yep, but two quality spinners should do the job on a tailor made spinning track

a Chandra and Gupte .... Kumble or Bedi or Parsanna .... would run through the opposition if the track is tailored made for spin

on tailored spinning tracks, i would have

- Gavaskar
- Sehwag [bowls spin]
- Merchant
- Tendulkar [bowls spin]
- Dravid
- 'X'
- WK
- Amar
- Nissar
- Quality Spinner
- Quality Spinner

'X' ----> a close call amongst Hazare, Kapil and Mankad .... will probably pick Hazare to strengthen the batting on a bowler friendly surface
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
You can't have an Indian team without Kapil IMO. There are five players who pick themselves: Merchant, Gavaskar, Dravid, Tendulkar and Kapil. You can argue about all the rest. I'd also have Nissar and Singh too, but they aren't as sure as a Kapil would be.
 

ret

International Debutant
You can't have an Indian team without Kapil IMO. There are five players who pick themselves: Merchant, Gavaskar, Dravid, Tendulkar and Kapil. You can argue about all the rest. I'd also have Nissar and Singh too, but they aren't as sure as a Kapil would be.
yep, but a few things to consider on a tailored turning track

1. how useful would Kapil's bowling be? I have picked two quick bowlers in Amar and Nissar assuming that they are the best two
2. how useful would Kapil's batting be? I would rather pick better batsmen than Kapil on spinner friendly tracks


even though Kapil is good enough to be in the side as a premier all-rounder, on this occasion, he neither makes it as the leading quick bowler nor as a leading batsman ... but yeah on normal tracks, he would always be in to lend that depth to both batting and bowling
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
yep, but a few things to consider on a tailored turning track

1. how useful would Kapil's bowling be? I have picked two quick bowlers in Amar and Nissar assuming that they are the best two
2. how useful would Kapil's batting be? I would rather pick better batsmen than Kapil on spinner friendly tracks
So on what basis Amar and Nissar are in the team ahead of Kapil as Bowlers ? (Not to forget Srinath doesn't even get a nomination).
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
Reckon I'd go for Nissar ahead of Prasanna myself TBH. Apart from that, your reasoning is absolutely smack-on to me. Never known all that much about Vijay Hazare or Vinoo Mankad until very recently, but they were clearly superlative cricketers.
I should have explained why I chose three spinners.

Its fine to say, we should have a balanced attack but even more importantly, you have to play your best bowlers. When West Indies had hoards of first class fast bowlers and no great spinners they played four of them in their side. Australia played ORielly and Grimmett together for so long though both were leg spinners (slightly different in style though) and sometimes with a third player who could bowl spin too.

So my logic is that India's strong suit is its spin. We are struggling to find new ball partners to partner Kapil but are struggling on the spin side not knowing who to leave out !!

So for me two front line new ball bowlers and two front line spinners is the minimum. Mankad comes in as the spinner all rounder. The fact that one of the front line new ball bowlers is such a good bat is incidental and a bonus.

I would concede that there is a lot of merit in bringing in Nissar. I would have played him in place of Amar Singh in the first place. He would replace one of the spinners only if we were playing in conditions helpful to pacers.

Remember again we are just chosing an XI. I have always maintained that people should chose squads to cover changes depending on conditions. In an XI there would always be the limitaion of 'suitability for conditions'.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Absolutely. We too oft ignore the fact that teams are (rightly) changed according to conditions.

All-time XI teams should be no different.
 

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
I should have explained why I chose three spinners.

Its fine to say, we should have a balanced attack but even more importantly, you have to play your best bowlers. When West Indies had hoards of first class fast bowlers and no great spinners they played four of them in their side. Australia played ORielly and Grimmett together for so long though both were leg spinners (slightly different in style though) and sometimes with a third player who could bowl spin too.

So my logic is that India's strong suit is its spin. We are struggling to find new ball partners to partner Kapil but are struggling on the spin side not knowing who to leave out !!

So for me two front line new ball bowlers and two front line spinners is the minimum. Mankad comes in as the spinner all rounder. The fact that one of the front line new ball bowlers is such a good bat is incidental and a bonus.

I would concede that there is a lot of merit in bringing in Nissar. I would have played him in place of Amar Singh in the first place. He would replace one of the spinners only if we were playing in conditions helpful to pacers.

Remember again we are just chosing an XI. I have always maintained that people should chose squads to cover changes depending on conditions. In an XI there would always be the limitaion of 'suitability for conditions'.
Absolutely true and sound logic ... The only thing is since we have a great batting line-up followed by Kapil and Engineer (and the fact that bowling is our weaker area), I would have had a better bowler in place of Mankad (sacrificing that extra bit of batting depth)...
 

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
The incomplete team till now is:

Merchant, Gavaskar, Dravid, Tendulkar, Hazare, Kapil, Engineer, Kumble, Srinath, Bedi.

Select another player to make the XI complete in a separate poll in another thread...3 spinners, 3 pacers, 3 al-rounders and 9 batsmen have been shortlisted...Vote on the basis of what you want the team composition to be...

Poll will remain open for 7 days...
 

Top